Indian Tulwar

[Jens Nordlunde]

Chris,
Here is a list of books. Some have been reprinted and some not.
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...lborough+House

When it comes to the hilt of you tulwar, my warning about the grain of salt is still valid. I had a look ain The Marlborough House by Hendley, which is a catalogue over the things prince Edward got when he visited India in 1876-76.
A lot of weapons are shown and two of them have hilts like yours.
One was given by H.H. The Nizam [of Hyderabad, Deccan], and the other by H.H. The Raja of Mandi.
So far we have three different places, and I am sure I can find more places. There is no doubt that these hilts/swords were in the different armouries at the time, but from where they origin is still an open question.

No 1 is from Case A, and no 149 is from Case G. Sorry for the bad quality.
Years ago I have uploaded all the Cases tot the forum, but I cant find them any more.

[Ian]

Jens,

I adjusted your picture of the two tulwar hilts for its overexposure. I think this one shows the details a little more clearly.

Ian.

[Jens Nordlunde]

Thanks very much Ian, in the book they ate black, but I know you can make the decoration come out - thanks a lot.
Jens

[sirupate]

Originally Posted by Ian

Jens,

I adjusted your picture of the two tulwar hilts for its overexposure. I think this one shows the details a little more clearly.

Ian.

They are beautiful, so Jens you don't agree with Matt Easton's hypothesis?

[Jens Nordlunde]

Which hypothesis is Matt Easton's hypothesis?

You should see the hilts in the Hendley book, they are close to black, but in a picture program you can make the decoration show.

[sirupate]

Hi Jens, you have done a great job in bringing the colours out.
Matt Easton in the video link I posted (sorry Jens I had presumed you had watched it) believes that the thumb should rest on the ear/langet of the tulwar to help align the edge. But like having the finger curled around the quillion it would leave the finger exposed, as you said in an earlier post about a ring to protect the finger if the quillion was to be used in that way.
All the best Simon

[Jens Nordlunde]

Simon,
Yes I did see Matt's video. When he said the thumb should be along the langet it would not mean much, as it would be on the underside of the sword, and there for better protected. But I dont know if it was so. Besides form that you would still need to place your four other fingers, and that seem to be the problem.

The attached picture is from a 16th century bronze, showing deiety holdidng a sword. I dont think they used these hits then, so it must be a very religious tradition to make the hilts like that.
You see a very narrow grip for the fingers, and the palm of the hand seems to rest on the upright disc.

[Jim McDougall]

Regarding the Matt Easton 'hypothesis'....I watched the very informative video, and Mr. Easton presents a most well reasoned analysis of the techniques used with the tulwar, but I must have missed the 'theory' part.

On the beautiful hilts Jens has shared from Hendley, I am noticing the distinct black background which showcases the gold koftgari, and am wondering if perhaps this style might have had anything to do with the 'shakudo' style of Japan. In the 18th century this fashion was transmitted to European smallswords etc via the East India factories there and in China etc.
It seems I have seen more detailed reference to this style decoration but cannot recall where at the moment. The color plates here are fantastic, especially as they show the key importance of the pommel discs and their inside decoration. Here we see the radiating sunburst, which in varying degree may represent one of the major Rajput clans.
The study of these kinds of symbolism, cosmological as well as floral are significant and intriguing subjects concerning Indian arms.

As Jens has noted, the subject of the 'hooked' finger around the quillon has been debated for a very long time, as also well noted by one of our extremely brilliant former members, B.I. , as I reviewed of one of our discussions on this from 2005.

There have been constant references to the physical size of the Indian individual thus the smaller hands result in the smaller grip size in tulwars hilt. In "By My Sword & Shield" (E. Jaiwent Paul, p.76) the author notes the physical size of Indian people is smaller, but further suggests that the small hilt was to cause a tighter fit for the hand, and that this emphasizes what he terms a sense of 'josh', which apparently loosely translates into a state of aggression, fervor and 'recklessness' in the wielder. Obviously a very subjective and provocative view, but worthy of note in discussion.

Though it is hard to imagine that the hilts of an entire weapon form could be fashioned around such a concept seems far fetched, however the idea of the physical size of the potential users of the sword seems more ascribed to in fact.
In "Swords of the British Army" (Brian Robson, 1975, p.57) in his description of the M1908 cavalry sword, notes , "...a modified version of the 1908 pattern was adopted by the Indian Army in 1918 the blade of which was identical but marked I.P.'08. The hilt generally was much smaller, to match the smaller hand of the Indian trooper".

Returning to the subject of the 'Indian ricasso', the unsharpened section of the blade near the hilt, Philip Rawson (The Indian Sword, 1967) suggests the reason may have been to safeguard the index finger, which ' ...art shows to have sometimes been hooked over the front quillon in India'.
Rawson apparently has this from Mr. B.W. Robinson of the V&A as he has noted in footnotes, however no mention is made of exactly what 'ART' is referred to.
In "Indian Arms and Armour" (G.N.Pant, Lahore, 1980, p.31), the author takes to task many of Rawson's observations and comments, however he seems very much in support of the purpose of the ricasso on Indian blades, and claims that this '..saves the fingers from being cut at the time of wielding", with the impression he is referring to 'accidental' slip of finger(s) over quillon.

I am wondering if the curious reference to 'art' in Mr. Rawson's reference to the finger hooked over the quillon may have been mind of an article by the late Anthony North ("A Late 15th Century Italian Sword", 'The Connoisseur', Dec. 1975, p.239). In his discussion the author notes "..placing the index finger around the base of the blade", a technique shown in Spanish and Italian paintings. His reference was footnoted as from Charles Buttin (1939).
Mr. Rawson was working with the V&A in cataloguing their Indian arms as he wrote his book, and Anthony North was of course with the V&A as well.

Is it possible that the hooked finger 'as seen in art' might have been misconstrued into India from the reference to Spanish and Italian practice?

It is of course noted, and as Jens has pointed out, that in these cases there was indeed a ring guard to protect the finger, thus one of the elements in the developing complex guards on these swords.

While it is well known that colonial activity and trade brought in European weapons, fashion and many other things but though it does not seem that swordsmanship techniques were among them. Still, the styling of arms and of course blades etc. were impacted greatly.

So whether the idea of hooking the forefinger around the quillon might have been from small size of the Indian hand, or if it was perhaps an element of technique taken from European swordsmanship, remains a quandary .

I think here it is important to consider more on the manner in which a tulwar was wielded. As shown in the Easton video, it was a sabre very much intended for the draw cut, thus not held nor used in the manner of European or other sabres. The large pommel disc precluded this type of flexibility.
As such, it was also not intended for sword to sword combat, as the draw cut is a sweeping movement and any sort of parry was for the shield.

The reason for the protective ring on European swords for the extended index finger was of course to guard from cuts resulting in blade to blade contact . The purpose of the finger extension on the European swords if I understand correctly was for better control in certain movements.
It seems I have seen it suggested that such a finger position would also add to control in certain cases with the tulwar, but uncertain if that would pertain to the drawcut.
Whatever the case, as ominous as it seems to have a finger 'outside' the guard, it does not seem that the type combat would expose it to danger.
(I still wouldn't advise it

Nothing conclusive of course, but I wanted to share some of the details of earlier debates and discussions with newer members and readers for them to pursue their own perspectives.

[sirupate]

Thank you for the superb info Jens and Jim.

Jim it may be that Shakudo came via Egypt and Greece and the possible transfer of these alloys to Japan through India and China, from a PDF article online;

Dr. Cóilín Ó*Dubhghaill
Senior Research Fellow, Art and Design Research Centre
Dr. A. H. Jones
Senior Research Fellow, Materials and Engineering Research Institute
Sheffield Hallam University
Sheffield, UK

It is unclear exactly when the development of the shakudo alloy took place. It seems possible that it was developed in Japan from yamagane, or unrefined copper, which naturally had other impurities such as arsenic and gold, and could be patinated to a dark brown color. Craddock and Giumlia-Mair suggest an alternative origin, describing alloys similar to shakudo in Egypt and Greece dating from the mid-second millennium BC, and the possible transfer of these alloys to Japan through India and China.1 The name shakudo first appeared in Japanese archives in the Nara period (710-784)2 while the oldest existing shakudo piece in Japan, dating from 1164

[Jim McDougall]

Sirupate, thank you for the additional information on shakudo!
I had no idea it extended that far into antiquity and in those civilizations.
My only familiarity came from references on smallswords using this type of motif. Naturally the decoration on Indian sword hilts has its own complexities, but I could not resist noting the similarity.

[mrcjgscott]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Nothing conclusive of course, but I wanted to share some of the details of earlier debates and discussions with newer members and readers for them to pursue their own perspectives.

Certainly very interesting and a concisely written argument Jim, I can certainly see the merits of such a grip position.

The only thing I can contribute, from my days collecting British Indian swords, is that I owned an example of their P08 version of the 1908 Cavalry Sword, which was marked to the 33rd cavalry. It was slightly heavier than its British counterpart, and the grip was made from a native hard wood, as opposed to the gutta percha of the early British 1908's.

If anything the grip on the 33rd cavalry example was slightly larger than the British version, although I could not tell you why!

I still have images somewhere, if they would be of use?

Kind regards,

Chris

[Jim McDougall]

Thank you for the kind words Simon, actually Jens is by far the 'master at arms' of tulwars and katars, and I learned mostly from and with him over a good number of years. Again, I do appreciate your additional input on the shakudo.
Ian, thank you for the backup with the links and references on this topic.

Chris, pretty exciting to hear of your interest in British/Indian swords, and my first field of collecting (many many years ago) was British cavalry swords. Eventually I came into the fascinating area between these and those of the native cavalry units of the Raj, then the hybrids of tulwars with British blades and so on.
With this it was inevitable that I became enthralled with Indian arms themselves, but always completely intrigued by the forms made for the Indian units, such as tulwars made by MOLE etc.

It is interesting to know of your example of the P08, and I really would be interested to know more on it. I did not wish to divert the momentum on this thread on tulwars, so perhaps we could start a thread on swords of the Indian cavalry.....definitely a topic worthwhile of its own focus.